Richard Gale & Gary Null PhD
Progressive Radio Network, February 23, 2023
With all of the money and media time spent on elections, there is a flawed assumption in Western nations that the most bright, experienced and gifted will win to serve the public’s most pressing needs and demands. Yet repeatedly the opposite is the case. For example, compare the stage of those who initially campaigned for high office with those who are eventually elected. Or compare the victor’s campaign platform with the lackluster pittance after serving in office. And this cycle of cognitive dissonance is repeated over and over again during every election season. Then there are soap boxes of identity politics to have us believe that a candidate’s gender and race will make a difference. That too has repeatedly been proven to be grossly untrue.
For those women who have fought, argued and debated for the advancement of rights for all women and to be given the same opportunities as men, we owe an enormous amount of gratitude to the Second Wave of feminism from the late 1960s forward. However, during the past half decade with the aggressive rise of identity politics, critical race theory, the woke agenda and a new generation of feminism, the context of women’s opportunity has shifted to what is being called equity. In the past, there was a belief that if more women were elected to positions of power, our world would become more humane and reasoned. We are familiar with phrases about a “woman’s touch”, the qualities of nurturing and care, and a mother’s compassion and kindness for her children. This contributed to the mystique that the influence of women in domestic and world affairs would bring greater cooperative harmony between nations and therefore less conflicts and wars. But after we survey today’s global landscape of women in high places of leadership, especially in the US and its allied member states in Europe, Canada and elsewhere, we discover these are mere beliefs that fuel a postmodern gender mythology. However, not all women leaders act from non-violent, compassionate and humanitarian motivations.
Putting gender aside, when we excavate under the topsoil of the human psyche, we still uncover the same rotting compost of human mental and emotional afflictions, crass desires for wealth, power and influence, aversion and hatred, and blatant ignorance and delusion. There are no gender assignments to these afflictions that are known in Eastern philosophy as the three poisons: delusional grasping, aversion and hatred, and ignorance. We should also add the other emotional afflictions of envy and jealousy. Our specific gender, race or ethnicity has no bearing upon these primal emotional energies nor how they manifest in a person’s life. They are simply part of genderless human weaknesses that are only overcome by a life devoted to nurturing essential universal ethical behaviors and acquiring the wisdom to know how and when to act upon them. If we want to seek for a context where there is certain equality between men and women, we will discover that everyone shares these identical mental and emotional foibles to a greater or lesser degree. This is basic, fundamental human psychology that overrides the distorted mental conceptions we might embrace about gender, race, identity politics, woke and anti-woke. Politicians are either a sane, non-neurotic, honest and compassionate human being or you’re not. If they are not, then the electorate should ignore them or publicly call them to account.
In the US, along with a few other nations such as the UK and Canada, wannabe politicians, men and women alike, are groomed for office. Simply being an intelligent, compassionate person with a 5-star resume certifying the genuineness of your voice to serve the basic fundamental needs of the working class, the downtrodden and discarded masses, the welfare of future generations, and the forests, rivers and other natural resources does not suffice. Unless you have been spruced up, preened, through the party systems’ grooming treadmill you dont have a chance in hell of rising to the top of America’s food chain. And how are our leaders groomed? Quite easily, their worst mental and emotional afflictions are sanitized to appear as popular strengths. They become masters of dog and pony shows. Dire weaknesses and feeble-minded reasoning are morphed into counterfeit public-spirited accomplishments to be sold to the electorate. We end up voting for rogues, deceptive simulacrums or imposters, who are more publicly slick than authentically presidential. One doesn’t need to read Dante’s Inferno to learn about the nine mental afflictions punished in the nine circles of hell; a simple tour through the government’s halls in Washington will offer visitors a first hand experience.
We delude ourselves in assuming that electing women to the Oval Office or as prime ministers in the European Union or any other nation is in and of itself an admirable goal or that it is some kind of “wise woman” thing. Or that in some mysterious way a woman in office — simply because it is a woman — means that wiser decisions will be made. That is a lala land mentality. Certainly, there were and are internationally recognized wise women in positions of power or influence. Many women have been global ambassadors for universal peace and who exhibit higher human values, such as Jane Goodall, Vandana Shiva, Medea Benjamin, Tulsi Gabbard, Naomi Wolf, Marriane Williamson, Clare Daly, Helen Caldicott, Jill Stein, Mary Robinson, etc. Globally, thousands more women could be mentioned who are capable of leading their nations far more humanely than the current crop of heads of state. But these dynamic women barely have the chance to reach any governmental high office because the rules of grooming are stacked against them. Therefore, it is not surprising that a quick survey of current women world leaders in positions of power shows they oppose peace, harmony, tolerance and cooperation. Rather than overcoming nationalist and ideological prejudices and biases, they fuel hatred and discord. If Hillary Clinton had reached the Oval Office, nothing would have changed simply because she happens to be a woman. She would have brought all the same mental afflictions of thirsting for more power and influence, avarice, deceit and hyperactive cognitive delusions into her administration as did her male predecessors.
All of the women leaders we list below advocate political correctness, censorship of uncomfortable information, and the suppression of free speech. A recent study conducted by Ghent University in Belgium measured Americans’ cognitive ability and “emotional intelligence. The researchers found a “moderate positive correlation between cognitive ability and support for freedom of speech, and a moderate negative correlation between cognitive ability and concern for political correctness.” In other words, Americans are clearly not electing ideal leaders of sound mind and emotions to govern and steer the nation towards a better future. And it goes without saying that deluded leaders will select equally deluded people to serve their policies. Outside of the American sphere of geo-economic and military influence, we do find notable wise women serving as presidents and prime ministers such as Rose Raponda in Gabon, Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh, Tanzania’s Samia Hassan, India’s president Drapadi Mumu, and Najla Bouren in Tunisia.
It goes without saying that with rampant globalization, scientific secularization, the rise of hedonic materialism as the apex of human prosperity, and vicious political correctness, our culture’s values and even collective national psychology has changed dramatically during the past several decades. We need a better accounting of the pervasive cognitive disconnect between the public’s desire for the best and brightest, and more ethically astute women and men to be our leaders and the public’s crass emotional insecurities that elect the opposite. The problem is that whenever we have women and men who possess constructive solutions to our many crises and have the courage to put a halt on the nation’s self-destructive hegemonic foreign policy, the American electorate has proved itself disinterested. We even fail to even recognize those who will visibly stand by our side. For example, why the lack of support for Jill Stein, Ralph Nader, Marianne Williamson, Rocky Anderson and some others noted above. Each would have been an outstanding leader. They would not allow themselves to be groomed by corporate interests or the deep state. For that reason the entire compromised media lined up against them along with Washington’s corporate influencers. Imagine where the world would be today if any of these individuals had been elected?
Some women leaders, for example, Madeleine Albright, are the antithesis of authentic feminism. It is rather inconceivable that a woman would state that the deaths of half a million Iraqi children under US sanctions was necessary collateral damage for America to achieve its geopolitical interests. As a leading architect for the destructive Balkanization of Yugoslavia, Albright is on record calling all Serbs filthy, and her virus of neocon hatred has deeply infected two of her proteges’ rabid Russophobia in the Biden administration: Victoria Nuland and Wendy Sherman. Both display the viciousness of hungry wolves, and we are fools if we believe that they are to be excused for their animosity against the preciousness of human life simply because they embody a woman’s body. But this trio is not alone; they are simply the exemplars of ignorance and avarice, power grabbing delusions that defile and poison all human decency and humanity’s demands to wage peace instead of war. This is not to ignore or forgive the despicable decisions and warmongering acts of men leaders. Rather, we are saying this is not simply an either-or choice based upon gender as to whether the planet will thrive or not.
It is time to take a deeper examination into this human drama of gender differentiation regarding leadership and power and put it into a proper perspective. No mainstream media differentiates between those who would bring the differences in civilizations, cultures, and political systems together versus those who would prefer to divide and conquer. At a time when we risk nuclear annihilation, humanity is on the precipice of an existential threat. We should all be opposed to the war in Ukraine and its real unspoken and unchallenged underpinnings of the West having exploited and threatened Russia and its natural assets since the Clinton White House. Sadly, the majority of today’s women in the highest offices of political leadership are every bit as aggressive and draconian as their male counterparts. Below are some of the formidable women leaders in Western nations who disgrace everything the early women’s movement hoped to achieve. It is hard to believe, but if these women leaders — as well as the current herd of their male counterparts — are any indication of the future trajectory for human survival, we could have less days on this planet than we might expect.
Here are several of the women who currently and in the recent past have held high positions in the US government. Based upon criteria defining emotional intelligence, they and their male comrades exemplify the low cognitive skills now leading the US to a direct war against Russia and China with a potential for nuclear war and annihilation.
Victoria Nuland – Current Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs
Under Obama, Nuland was the Asst Secretary of State for Eastern Europe Affairs, which included Ukraine. She was the leading architect in Hillary Clinton’s State Department for funding and orchestrating the Ukraine’s 2014 Maidan Coup (Orange Revolution) and directly supported the Ukrainian nationalist and neoNazi militias to overthrow Ukraine’s democratically elected president Yankuvich. Her husband Robert Kagan is arguably the arch-Republican neocon who played a role in the design of the Project for the New American Century, which outlined a manifesto for America’s global hegemonic role. She is also a board member of the National Endowment for Democracy – a neocon nonprofit disguised as a humanitarian organization and acts behind the scenes to foment regime change within nations that don’t buy into US’s delusions of global exceptionalism. And like the other American women leaders listed below, Nuland can’t allow a potential opportunity for war to be wasted. Therefore she supported the US invasions and interventions into Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, and proxy war against Russia.
Wendy Sherman – current Deputy Secretary of State Department
Similar to Nuland, Sherman was groomed by Madeleine Albright during Clinton years to be a rabid Russophobe and also played a role in bringing Ukrainian far-right nationalists into power. This is a woman who suffers serious delusions of grandeur. During an NPR interview she stated, “She [Madeleine Albright] taught me early on that when one negotiates, I am not really Wendy Sherman or even a woman or a 72 year old grandmother. I AM the United States of America. And if one understands that, you come to the table with an enormous amount of power.” Like her mentor, she has supported all of the US’s wars and interventions during the past three decades.
Condoleezza Rice – Bush’s 2nd Secretary of State
Rice is currently the director of the conservative Hoover Institute and a Russian/Soviet scholar. During Bush Sr’s term, she worked on the National Security Council when the Soviet Union dissolved. Fully committed to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, she had a role in the lies and cover up scams to accuse Saddam of possessing weapons of mass destruction. This is a woman who supported water boarding and refused to speak out honestly against the US’s crimes of torture being conducted in the Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib prisons.
Susan Rice – Obama’s UN Ambassador to UN and later the National Security Advisor
Rice deserves the credit for being one of the primary developers of propaganda and lies leading up to the US/NATO invasion of Libya. Documents show she was simply a mannequin for CIA talking points. Her neocon ideology believed it was the US’s global mission to overthrow Assad’s government in Syria and to be silent on Israel’s violent overarching bombing of Gaza and the deaths of innocent men, women and children. Another one of our rabid Russophobic leaders, she made efforts to pillar Trump’s efforts to normalize relations with Russia. This is another warmongering woman who supports the Ukrainian coup d’etat and fascist regime and every US war and intervention since the Clinton administration. She is also one of Klaus Schwab’s “young global leaders” at the World Economic Forum and therefore an admirer of the Great Reset.
Samantha Powers – Obama’s Ambassador to UN
Another one of the WEF’s young global leaders, Powers is currently Biden’s head Administrator for the US Agency for International Development (USAID) — a humanitarian organization created in 1961 to “win the hearts and minds” of poorer nations but as morphed into an intelligence arm of the CIA with secret bank accounts in several countries. Powers is a proponent of the perverted Democratic Party’s doctrine of double-speak that military intervention is a humanitarian effort to bring peace and prosperity to other nations. She is reported to have been the key person who convinced Obama to militarily intervene for overthrowing Libyan leader Gaddafi.
Nikki Haley – Trump’s Ambassador to UN
Haley is the Republican representative young global leader in Klaus Schwab’s harem at the WEF and another zealous Russophobe. As the UN ambassador, she threatened North Korea with military force, was responsible for the US withdrawal from UN Human Rights Council, opposed UN efforts to ban the death penalty, and opposed US support of UN Relief Agency aid going to Palestinians.
We may also mention that 4 of the 5 most powerful CEOs in the private military defense industry, responsible for the most sophisticated weapons of destruction are women
Kathy Warden – CEO of Northrop Grumman
Marilyn Hewson – CEO of Lockheed Martin. (Chief Executive Magazine 2018 CEO of year)
Phebe Novakovic – CEO of General Dynamics
Leanne Caret – CEO of Boeing Defense and Security
When we look at America’s major allies and members of NATO, the situation is no better. Since the start of this year, there have been ten women prime ministers in Europe plus New Zealand, all except two have expressed themselves as Russophobic neocons who support the buildup of NATO despite the organization having legitimately expended its international usefulness in 1991. There is Estonia’s Kaja Kallas who opposes a ceasefire in the Ukraine conflict until Russia is defeated and the Russian population can undergo “reeducation. Finland’s dancing queen Sanna Mari is another one of the Davos darlings who has stated NATO should have started a war directly against Russia in February 2022. Based upon Seymour Hersh’s revelations of the US orchestrated demolition of the Nordstream pipeline, questions may be raised whether Norway’s Erna Solberg was a co-conspirator in this act of international terrorism. Former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss during a public Q&A stated she was willing to push the red button to start a nuclear weapons exchange against Putin. How about Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, an neo-Nazi sympathizer towards Ukraine’s far-right Banderite nationalists which goes back to the start of her political career. Finally a special mention to Germany’s Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock who undoubtedly competes with Victoria Nuland for a neocon hypocrisy award. Baerbock openly stated that Ukraine’s military assistance is more important than the energy and living needs of the German people. Finally there are the other Russophobic women prime ministers of Italy (Giorgia Meloni), Lithuania (Ingrida Simonyte), Moldova’s Maia Sandu (whose unpopularity forced her to resign in January), and Denmark’s Mette Fredriksen. Along with this faux women warrior club, we discover the current women defense ministers of Canada, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal and Spain, each a willing puppet supporting the US-controlled NATO’s proxy war against Russia.
If this is the caliber of women being elected to high office in the West, we again need to rethink the likelihood of a peaceful world in the future. The good news is that the older geopolitical and international economic structures that the US has defined and steered for the past three decades are being broken down. As the global community continues to reorient itself to the dynamic changes underway with the emergence of a multipolar world, we can hope that the authentic wise women will be recognized as the childbearers for a new order of peace, cooperation and an end to conflicts and wars by hegemonic militarist powers. Hide message history RG.